Author Topic: For All Mankind (Read 227811 times)

neoforce · « **Reply #660 on:** 08/31/2022 01:56 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 08/24/2022 02:35 pm

Quote from: neoforce on 08/23/2022 10:03 pm
Most of the characters (except Danny again) are complex/interesting enough to be engaging.

I think that they tried to make Danny complex, they just failed to make him interesting. Like any character in entertainment, if all they are is self-destructive (and destructive), that's not very interesting. It's not even that interesting when we learn why they are that way. Characters become more interesting when we see that they have positive qualities, that there is strength amidst their weaknesses.

With Danny we never really got that. When he was buried in the rover with Ed we learned that he carried around a tremendous amount of guilt, and that his guilt was not all related to his fling with Karen. (In fact, his thing with Karen may have been more of a consequence than a cause of his guilt.) But that came kinda late--we spent many episodes loathing the guy and then seeing his actions result in the deaths of three people. It gets a little hard to forgive a character after we see all the bad that they've done. Had they introduced that information earlier, it might have helped. But did we ever see anything positive about Danny other than in the first episode when he went outside the station to shut off the thruster? That was heroic, but after that, he was just awful.

that's a dead on and great analysis. If they had explored his guilt about losing his best friend prior to the affair in season two, it might have made that a bit less cringy. And would have helped this season too. Seems to me the wrote the affair story without a thought of the character at all, just for the drama/shock value. Then continued to use Danny as a foil to create drama where needed.

EE Scott · « **Reply #661 on:** 08/31/2022 02:19 pm »

I have to give Casey Johnson credit for doing the best he could with the role of Danny. After so many episodes where he is called on to be this brooding, non-communicative dude, when called upon to finally express himself to Ed he nailed his scenes - to me he was convincing as a tortured soul. That being said, his whole character arc is one I could have done without.

One thing I forgot about but was reminded of when I was recently re-watching Season 1, is that right after Shane's death, Danny confesses to Karen that the school trouble that caused Shane to have to sneak out on his bike to attend his game (which caused his death) was all his fault. In that scene Karen can't handle the information and she just walks away. But to the best of my knowledge that fact was never mentioned again until the end of Season 3.

sanman · « **Reply #662 on:** 08/31/2022 11:29 pm »

Just like Season 4 of Stranger Things, we had multiple plot-arcs in different localities conveniently reaching climactic crescendo all at once in synchronization. And I can accept that, in the name of good emotional payoff. However, I found the "NASA-hating rednecks" to be complete cardboard cutouts, with totally unconvincing motivations. Like the menacing Russians, they seemed to be a product of a Hollywood trope-fest. Going full McVeigh like that, without even giving us the barest glimpse of why, felt overly contrived. I almost expected Danny to bite the bullet in place of Ed, perhaps sacrificing himself to save Kelly in an act of final redemption. But I really liked Ed's display of leadership under duress, rebuffing Danny while telling him that he'd face accountability afterwards.

I still don't get how North Korea could be plausibly shown as reaching Mars before China. USA and USSR perhaps, but North Korea should be far behind ESA as well. Is there even a European Union in this timeline? Perhaps not, if the USSR has had an extended lease on life. There was no Chernobyl apparently - could Margot's helpful leaks of nuclear secrets have affected that?

It's bad enough for one person to be Mark Watney on Mars -- but can 9 people really do that? Perhaps teamwork amplifies chances of survival, with strength in numbers?

MMU (Manned Maneuvering Unit) is the name of the real life NASA system that turns a lone astronaut into a spacecraft.

What does TMU stand for? I assume that MMU uses hypergolics(hydrazine), but are there any other possibilities for superior performance? This Watney maneuver seems to be the new gold standard for orbital heroics.

Blackstar · « **Reply #663 on:** 08/31/2022 11:32 pm »

Quote from: neoforce on 08/31/2022 01:56 pm

Seems to me the wrote the affair story without a thought of the character at all, just for the drama/shock value. Then continued to use Danny as a foil to create drama where needed.

Yeah. Back in season 2 that event seemed very random, for both of them. And the psychological implications for both characters are really rather icky--was Danny seeking a substitute mother because his own mom was not so great? If so, why did he want to sleep with Karen? (As I said... ick.) Same thing for Karen. (Double ick.)

It is possible that there were scenes in season 2 that were written and not filmed, or filmed and then cut, that explained some things leading up to their affair. But that's not really an excuse. Without any explanation, the whole thing seemed like the writers saying "Let's really tick off our audience!"

I do think that the writers really redeemed Karen in the third season. They made her strong and clever. And there was a great line about how she was always those things, but they came out differently after she was divorced.

And I'll give the writers some credit for what they did not do. There was no hint of a romance between her and her business partner (Tracy's former husband). That could have been cliched, but they did not go there. He turned out to be a good guy. And Karen turned out to be a good person. There was not even a hint about her having any kind of romantic relationship in the previous decade after her divorce from Ed. Maybe she did have some relationships, but it was not mentioned. And that was a good way to develop her character. She wasn't defined by her romantic relationships to men.

DaveS · « **Reply #664 on:** 08/31/2022 11:48 pm »

Quote from: sanman on 08/31/2022 11:29 pm

I assume that MMU uses hypergolics(hydrazine)

The MMU used high-pressure GN2 supplied by the orbiter, not hydrazine. It could be refuelled when it was attached to its Flight Support Station mounted to the sidewall of the payload bay.

sanman · « **Reply #665 on:** 09/01/2022 02:11 am »

Quote from: DaveS on 08/31/2022 11:48 pm

Quote from: sanman on 08/31/2022 11:29 pm
I assume that MMU uses hypergolics(hydrazine)
The MMU used high-pressure GN2 supplied by the orbiter, not hydrazine. It could be refuelled when it was attached to its Flight Support Station mounted to the sidewall of the payload bay.

Okay, I guess hypergolics would be overkill compared to cold-gas thrusters for MMU.

But for the Watney-style scene with the TMU in FAM, we can see that they did light up, and weren't mere cold gas thrusters. Anyone have any speculations on what the propellant(s) might be?

jdon759 · « **Reply #666 on:** 09/01/2022 09:11 am »

HTP? It at least has a history of being used in small manned applications.

Jer · « **Reply #667 on:** 09/09/2022 03:41 pm »

The completely jumped the shark this season. Why couldn't it just stay a semi-realistic alternate history show about the space race like it was initially. They didn't even need the time jumps, there was so much actual events/people/history that could've been mined for story-lines. They could've had a season long arc of just showing the debates around the Shuttle design in a timeline where a Lunar base was the top priority of NASA, but Ron Moore thinks the audience for this show has the attention span of a tiktok addicted 12 year old. And yes, they could still had inter-personal conflicts and family drama (and there was a lot of the latter in real life) but make it the result of the main scifi story-arc.

Blackstar · « **Reply #668 on:** 09/10/2022 01:38 am »

Quote from: Jer on 09/09/2022 03:41 pm

They could've had a season long arc of just showing the debates around the Shuttle design in a timeline where a Lunar base was the top priority of NASA, but Ron Moore thinks the audience for this show has the attention span of a tiktok addicted 12 year old.

A season-long show about the debates about the space shuttle? I'm a policy wonk, and that would have bored everybody, including me.

I'm no fan of season 3, but the show is not simply about space, it's about exploring various political, social, and cultural aspects of an alternative history.

Skylon · « **Reply #669 on:** 09/19/2022 12:21 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 09/10/2022 01:38 am

Quote from: Jer on 09/09/2022 03:41 pm
They could've had a season long arc of just showing the debates around the Shuttle design in a timeline where a Lunar base was the top priority of NASA, but Ron Moore thinks the audience for this show has the attention span of a tiktok addicted 12 year old.

A season-long show about the debates about the space shuttle? I'm a policy wonk, and that would have bored everybody, including me.

I'm no fan of season 3, but the show is not simply about space, it's about exploring various political, social, and cultural aspects of an alternative history.

I think a middle ground could have been struck. Rather than jumps of a decade, maybe 5 years? The late 70's would be an interesting contrast since it was a period when there were ZERO US spaceflights. It would have been cool to see the real transition from the alt timeline's Apollo to Shuttle. Similar for the late 80's where we could have seen the growth of commercial space we got in season 3.

Blackstar · « **Reply #670 on:** 09/19/2022 04:58 pm »

Yeah, but these are essentially arguments with the premise of the show--in other words, people saying "I don't like this show, I want a different show." The producers want the show to have these time jumps, and they want to use the show to comment about American politics, culture, and social issues. Those things are inherently part of the show, not merely tacked onto a show about space stuff.

Skylon · « **Reply #671 on:** 09/20/2022 01:15 pm »

Quote from: Blackstar on 09/19/2022 04:58 pm

Yeah, but these are essentially arguments with the premise of the show--in other words, people saying "I don't like this show, I want a different show." The producers want the show to have these time jumps, and they want to use the show to comment about American politics, culture, and social issues. Those things are inherently part of the show, not merely tacked onto a show about space stuff.

That's fair. Seasons 1 and 3 seem to following the track of a theme of "space is hard" and what's needed to push the frontier of space. With season 2 being a breather to explore the implications of the Cold War on the Moon. I am guessing we'll be getting some of that on Mars in season 4 now that the show has humans there. I just think a little more time could have spent exploring the political, cultural and social implications of what we are seeing, but considering how short the seasons of modern TV tend to be, I get why the creators are making those jumps faster.

Blackstar · « **Reply #672 on:** 09/20/2022 02:06 pm »

Quote from: Skylon on 09/20/2022 01:15 pm

Quote from: Blackstar on 09/19/2022 04:58 pm
Yeah, but these are essentially arguments with the premise of the show--in other words, people saying "I don't like this show, I want a different show." The producers want the show to have these time jumps, and they want to use the show to comment about American politics, culture, and social issues. Those things are inherently part of the show, not merely tacked onto a show about space stuff.

That's fair. Seasons 1 and 3 seem to following the track of a theme of "space is hard" and what's needed to push the frontier of space. With season 2 being a breather to explore the implications of the Cold War on the Moon. I am guessing we'll be getting some of that on Mars in season 4 now that the show has humans there. I just think a little more time could have spent exploring the political, cultural and social implications of what we are seeing, but considering how short the seasons of modern TV tend to be, I get why the creators are making those jumps faster.

I'll admit that I'm not a fan of all the time jumps. Some of the shorter jumps seemed like they were jumping away from some plot corner that they wrote themselves into. However, at least in those cases, they may have skipped over solving one dilemma and then presented a new dilemma.

But I think there's a difference in the way that FMK is using science fiction to comment on social issues compared to some previous shows. Star Trek and Battlestar Galactica (2003) used science fiction as a way to comment on contemporary social issues. FMK seems to use it both to comment on contemporary social issues, but then they comment on those issues directly (in other words, the premise is not an allegory, as it was in those other shows). It's not "science fiction to comment..." it is "science fiction and comment..."

The creators of the show have said so in interviews. They wanted to change a key social or political event and show the consequences, but they also wanted to show how not everything changes as a result. So a woman lands on the Moon, and the Equal Rights Amendment passes, and by the 1990s the United States has a female president. But homophobia is still present in American society as are other social ills. It's not like one change magically makes everything better.

I thought that one of the best bits of writing along those lines was when Ed tells Danielle that the reason she was picked to head the Mars mission was because she's black. He was her friend. They lived and struggled together. And she made a huge sacrifice while on the Moon to help their mutual friend who was going crazy. Despite all that, despite how much she had proven herself (remember: she literally saved the world in the 1980s), he still had those feelings.

Saturn1234 · « **Reply #673 on:** 09/25/2022 08:02 am »

Do you have any period sources/documents that were used to create the Jamestown base for Season 1?

Blackstar · « **Reply #674 on:** 03/28/2023 01:58 pm »

https://twitter.com/fam_news_/status/1639470194627330048

EE Scott · « **Reply #675 on:** 03/29/2023 05:14 pm »

That's great. I can't wait to get an update on these characters ~10 years in the future - especially Margo, but everybody else as well. It will be very interesting how other characters pick up the narrative slack created by the casualties of Season 3. Also, perhaps the emphasis on social issues will be a bit less as the show continues the deviation from our own timeline. Or not.

kennerado · « **Reply #676 on:** 05/25/2023 07:21 am »

So I put off watching this show and just finished binging all 3 seasons, the 1st and (most of) the 2nd seasons were pretty good. As already discussed, season 3 not only jumped the shark, it jumped the megalodon. I guarantee you that Ron Moore was pressured to add some elements to this show which make little sense like the stupid Danny subplot and the hilarious NK Mars mission. NK is barely mentioned before this, actually I don't think they're mentioned at all until that season.

The best character and story goes to Gordo, that was tremendous and written fantastically, and the actor did a great job. The casting for the show is another strong point, and I didn't even know any of the actors except for the dude who played Deke (he was this bumbling sheriff in True Blood).

I don't know if I'll continue watching it, since they are presumably up to the early 21st century, I wonder who the US president will be? I bet they don't have Bush Jr...maybe Al Gore? I think Trump attempted a Presidential run around 2002...THAT would be hilarious.

Blackstar · « **Reply #677 on:** 05/25/2023 11:19 am »

Quote from: kennerado on 05/25/2023 07:21 am

So I put off watching this show and just finished binging all 3 seasons, the 1st and (most of) the 2nd seasons were pretty good. As already discussed, season 3 not only jumped the shark, it jumped the megalodon. I guarantee you that Ron Moore was pressured to add some elements to this show which make little sense like

I think Moore left running the show at some point during S3. He has some other big projects.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #678 on:** 09/13/2023 03:13 pm »

Quote

Start your future at Helios.

https://twitter.com/forallmankind_/status/1701975324785770799

Quote

For All Mankind returns November 10.

FutureSpaceTourist · « **Reply #679 on:** 09/13/2023 03:15 pm »

Quote

Why shoot for the moon when you can shoot for Mars? Start your future at Helios. For All Mankind returns November 10 on Apple TV+ https://apple.co/__ForAllMankind

Rocketing into the new millennium in the eight years since Season 3, Happy Valley has rapidly expanded its footprint on Mars by turning former foes into partners. Now 2003, the focus of the space program has turned to the capture and mining of extremely valuable, mineral-rich asteroids that could change the future of both Earth and Mars. But simmering tensions between the residents of the now-sprawling international base threaten to undo everything they are working towards.

The ensemble cast returning for Season 4 includes Joel Kinnaman, Wrenn Schmidt, Krys Marshall, Edi Gathegi, Cynthy Wu and Coral Peña along with new series regulars Toby Kebbell, Tyner Rushing, Daniel Stern and Svetlana Efremova.